this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2026
26 points (59.7% liked)
Memes
56976 readers
1450 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
defending fascist, far-right states are we? the carnage must continue, unnumered more innocents must suffer and die before the modern liberal can admit they've been lied to by their own governments? i know by experience that it sucks to own up that you've been had (i used to be a unquestioning slava ukrainer) but admitting the problem exists is the first step towards fixing it. in the fight against imperialism both Ukraine('s current government) and Israel (the entire settler-colonial project) are deeply on the side of imperialism, as well as being absolutely fascist states. neither can bring peace for their people or anyone else involved, because they both only exist to provide war for US imperial ambitions.
That's an interesting perspective, thanks for sharing.
As for me, I oppose fascism. I wish Ukraine to remain a sovereign nation.
Which is it?
Ukrainian Nationalism has been a fascist project since its inception, you can't oppose fascism and support Banderites.
It's also been a CIA and NATO supported nationalist project since the start of the Cold War to the present day.
Are you suggesting that Ukraine may not exist as a sovereign nation due to their current political situation?
I never thought I'd live to meet somebody so avidly supporting the Soviet Union. That's genuinely amazing.
Communism is on the rise globally, in the US a third of young people are sympathetic to communism.
That is almost certainly not true, but let's put that aside as it's entirely irrelevant. Do you think that the Soviet Union was an exemplary communist state?
It's certainly true, according to a poll by Cato Institute:
As for my opinion on the Soviet Union, it was enormously progressive. Women gained the right to vote ahead of most western countries. Life expectancy doubled, from the 30s to 70s. Famine was ended. Housing cost approximately 5% of people's incomes. Working hours reduced, while wages rose. Literacy rates tripled, from the 30s to 99.9%. Workers for the first time in history truly established a state for themselves, by themselves.
It's nice that the Cato Institute found 421 people in support of their poll. Can we move on from this nonsense statistic?
Life behind the iron curtain was not as rosy as you make it out to be. I don't know what your intentions are to argue in favor of it, but I and my family have living memories of how awful it was. I don't need to hear from an armchair internet historian to make it out for something it wasn't.
I'm not necessarily saying that communism is bad, but the Soviet Union is not something any of the former Soviet states, Russia included, should aspire to return to.
do explain!
lol coward
either a liar or a family with fascist history
This does not explain why the USSR was so awful, that sounds like Nazis that did that not the Soviets.
You literally have memories of it, your family does too, correct? So explain why the USSR was so horrible according to you.
you dummy, you suddenly draw your grandfather into this and make it all about that when I was still asking you about why the fuck you consider the USSR to be so horrible for you and your family. Are you going to answer that?
I am telling you to explain in any way why you consider the USSR horrible for you and your family. Knock it off with the fucking crocodile tears
convince me you're not, tell me why. You're avoiding this really fucking hard all the time and trying to pivot the conversation to something for you to guilt trip over. How is this not suspicious?
Why bring it up and then refuse to elaborate? It makes you look like an idiot.
We all have. They all say you're full of shit lol. Explain your dumb shit history or shut the fuck up about it.
Are you familiar with how statistics work? Throw the US population into this sample size calculator. 421 is enough for around 95% confidence. Kinda like how doubling every number starting from 1 rapidly grows beyond expectation after only a couple dozen iterations, sample sizes do not need to be anywhere close to the population size to accurately predict within a 5% degree of confidence.
As for the Soviet Union, it doesn't really matter what you have to say about it. Regardless of your own, individual experiences, the collective experiences of the soviet peoples speak the opposite. The overwhelming majority of post-soviet citizens regret the fall of socialism, and in countries like Russia, more people support socialism than capitalism.
What I'm trying to say is that ultimately, it's the people that make history, and the people of Russia understand the need for socialism. It won't be the Soviet Union, that time is over. But it will be similar in many ways, and that's a great thing.
Regarding the stats on the rise of communist sympathies among younger people, again, this is from a right-wing institute that specifically does not want people to identify as communist. It's McCarthyism.
As for calling the Soviet Union a "utopia," I never did. I simply stated facts about the Soviet Union. For example, life expectancy:
All of what I said can be rather easily verified. Is it a "complete" picture? No. I explained why I support the Soviet Union, and those were some of the many reasons.
So you agree with them, that life under socialism was materially better than life under capitalism 👍
Neither we nor the Soviets/ex-Soviets ever claimed that socialism or communism was or ever will be utopian, only that they are better than capitalism.
Ukrainian sovereignty is best achieved from revolutionary defeatism to overthrow the Banderite government. A socialist Ukraine that stands against the infestation of western capital would better be in control of its own interests, and would solve Russia's security concerns that led to it entering the Ukrainian Civil War. At the present rate, what will remain of Ukraine will be a thoroughly dependent rump state being siphoned of its natural resources by the west.
That's a roundabout way of stating that it should be annexed by Russia.
Not only does Russia have no interest at the moment to annex all of Ukraine, just the pro-Russian separatist regions in the Donbass, but Ukraine doesn't really have much of a choice to begin with. Every day they lose leverage. Either they draw out the war, forcing Russia into a costlier and lengthier victory, they surrender soon and get to keep as much as possible, or the people can rise and replace the Banderite government with a socialist one. Unfortunately, thanks to the Banderite government targeting leftists for the last decade, the first and second options are the most likely.
"Should" doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of geopolitics, otherwise Palestine would already be free.
You have a direct line to the interests of the Kremlin, do you?
If Russia has no intention for more, then why would drawing the war out be disadvantageous for Ukraine? Why are you opposed to the war being costly to Russia?
It's odd to me that you would argue in support of Russia's good intentions and in favor of Ukraine conceding a second major annexation of parts of a sovereign nation without casus belli. I can only imagine one possible reason and it's not in the interests of the people of Ukraine.
No ties to the Kremlin whatsoever, I'm just a communist organizer and student of Marxism-Leninism. Part of that is an understanding of dialectical materialism, which helps me identify the underlying material forces at play.
The reason drawing the war out is bad for Ukraine is because it means many thousands more Ukrainians will die for worse terms of surrender. The only group that benefits is the western imperialist class that signed mineral rights and more with Ukraine in exchangd for cash and supplies.
The reason drawing the war out for Russia should be opposed is because Russians are human beings that don't deserve to die either.
As for not having a casus belli, there are 2 critical ones.
The Ukrainian Civil War, that began in 2014, led to the secession of the pro-Russian Donestk and Luhansk People's Republics. These people have a right to self-determination, and freedom from the Banderite state. These people are ethnically more Russian, so Russians sympathize with their plight.
The Banderite government was to host missiles on their border pointed directly at Moscow and other major populated cities, with a 6 minute travel time. Rather than let NATO continue to encircle Russia with its imperialist forces, Russia decided to preemptively stop such a threat.
None of this should come across as "odd" to you.
Both of those claims are very contested, surely we can agree on that? Western journalists in the region reported in real time during that period that both these events were driven by Russian operatives. I'm not quick to believe everything I read, but that goes both ways.
The fact that you use "Banderite government"—or "Banderite" at all—and so openly support the Soviet Union to me calls your motivation into question, so yes, I certainly find your position and arguments extremely odd.
Western journalists also widely reported on the events I stated, before the entry of Russia into the Ukrainian Civil War. The west has since censored Russian speech from the eyes of westerners, and self-censored the problems with the Ukrainian government that they so widely reported on prior to 2022.
As for the fact that I oppose Banderite fascists, and support socialism, that makes perfect sense considering I told you that I'm a communist. I devote a significant portion of my free time and disposable income to participating in that movement, though not in Russia or Europe at all. My motivation should be the clearest thing in this thread for you!
Your comments could only make sense to me if you believe both:
1 is unquestionably correct, it's how private media operates. As for 2, the idea of a "model communist state" is flawed thinking. Socialist countries like the USSR are not necessarily "models," each has their own problems that come from existing in the real world, and not our heads. I support socialism, and the workers that make the world. The historical USSR fell into that category, and now the mantle is held by the PRC, DPRK, Vietnam, Laos, and Cuba.
I can only very simply state that I vehemently disagree on both points.
That's not entirely true. You could try to present an argument for why. If that's not possible, perhaps you should do some more digging on your own? Maybe expand your understanding?
what are these personal experiences? Can you go into more detail?
Can you give an example of a claim that I made that cannot be substantiated? Secondly, can you give an example of a claim I made that contradicts your personal experiences?
The claims are easily verifiable on US internet, from msm, without using a VPN.
Lmfao.
It's definitely immensely difficult to come to terms with the fact that privately owned media controls most of what most people see and know about the rest of the world. You could call it a conspiracy
you liberals snort russiagate conspiracies like coke, really cooked your brains..
Care to explain? My point was that we can't know Putin's intentions.
The intention was to not let nazi NATO build troops at their border. Right now Ukraine is being used like a spear against Russia and when Lindsay Graham says "down to the last Ukrainian" he meant it; https://busification.org/
Ukraine is not a member of NATO. I'm sorry, but I don't follow your reasoning in support of the invasion of Ukraine. Please dumb it down for me.
Same here, though imo first the Ukrainians would need to kick out the US/NATO-backed fascists that are pretending to be a sovereign and functioning state.
If we put aside for a moment whether that's true or not, what do you think will happen to Ukraine as a nation if it no longer has the support from NATO countries? Is that the outcome you desire for Ukraine?